Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC)-induced diarrhea is recognized frequently in individuals who travel in developing countries around the world (4, 7, 8, 26, 29, 47) and is a major medical problem for military personnel deployed in these countries (26, 44, 45). Since strict personal hygiene and avoidance of local water and fresh and undercooked foods are recommendations with which travelers have difficulty complying, other means to reduce the ETEC attack rate must be considered. The use of short-term chemoprophylaxis and self-treatment for diarrhea are effective for travelers who are unwilling to accept even a short period of illness because of the serious impact it would have on their overall mission. However, the routine use of antimicrobial prophylaxis for the general traveler is not recommended because of the potential for associated adverse drug reactions and the potential to worsen the problem of antibiotic resistance of enteric bacteria (8, 25, 29, 43, 47). These factors make development of vaccines against ETEC a priority. ETEC strains produce a heat-labile toxin (LT) and/or a heat-stable toxin (ST) that are largely responsible for the symptoms of diarrhea. LT is immunogenic, but ST is a peptide and nonimmunogenic. ETEC strains also express antigenically distinct fimbriae collectively termed colonization factors (CF) (5). The most common CF include colonization factor antigen I (CFA/I), CFA/II, and CS6 (59). The protective role of the host immune response to specific antigens, such as CF or toxins, or of specific components of the immune system, such as secretory immunoglobulin A (IgA) in the intestine, is not well defined. Previous studies showed that CF were protective when volunteers were challenged with homologous strains of ETEC after they were either passively immunized with immunoglobulin with specific activity against CF (18, 54) or actively immunized or infected (9, 12, 14, 34, 36, 37, 55). Antitoxic protection based on an immune response to the heat-labile toxin was suggested based on field trials by Clemens et al. (6), who used the B subunit of whole-cell cholera vaccine and induced cross-protection against severe diarrhea caused by ETEC LT in immunized volunteers. The data described above suggest that an ETEC vaccine would have to include the most prevalent colonization factors and have antitoxin activity. Thus, vaccine development is complicated because a vaccine would require several CF, as well as LT, and would require tests of a number of vaccine prototypes. Because there is no established immunological correlate of protection against ETEC diarrhea, the efficacy of vaccine candidates that are developed is likely to be evaluated after a direct challenge to humans with ETEC. The use of human volunteers for studying immunity and the pathogenesis of ETEC infection after oral ingestion of strain B7A or {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"H10407","term_id":"875229","term_text":"H10407"}}H10407 has been described previously. ETEC strain B7A has been given to nearly 50 volunteers (9, 35, 36). B7A is a serotype O148:H28 strain and expresses LT, ST, CS6 (40), longus (19), and an unidentified adhesin (33). The most common symptoms in volunteers challenged with B7A were diarrhea, abdominal cramps, and malaise. Previous exposure to B7A protected volunteers from illness but not shedding (36). The level of serum antibody response to lipopolysaccharide varied from 20 to 90% (9, 36), but the immune response to other antigens has not been reported. E. coli strain {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"H10407","term_id":"875229","term_text":"H10407"}}H10407 is the most commonly used ETEC challenge strain and has been given to over 200 volunteers (2, 11-14, 18, 20, 35, 37, 54). It is a serotype O78:K80:H11 strain and was isolated from an adult with severe diarrhea in Dacca, Bangladesh (13). {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"H10407","term_id":"875229","term_text":"H10407"}}H10407 expresses the enterotoxins LT (50), ST (both STIa and STIb) (41), and CFA/I (13). It also expresses EAST (60), Tia (15), Tib (38), Leo (16), and EatA (46), which may play roles in virulence. The symptoms in volunteers challenged with {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"H10407","term_id":"875229","term_text":"H10407"}}H10407 were (from most frequent to least frequent) gurgling, abdominal cramps, diarrhea, anorexia, malaise, nausea or vomiting, headache, and fever. The diarrheal stool volumes ranged from 0.1 to 11 liters, and the time until onset of symptoms after challenge was typically 2 days. Nearly all challenged volunteers shed {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"H10407","term_id":"875229","term_text":"H10407"}}H10407, and shedding lasted approximately 1 week unless the volunteers were treated with antibiotics. Previous exposure to {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"H10407","term_id":"875229","term_text":"H10407"}}H10407 protected volunteers from illness but not shedding (37). Serum IgG responses to CFA/I, LT, and O78 were detected after challenge (13, 20, 35, 37, 49, 54) in many volunteers, but secretory IgA was assayed in only one study (35). Here we describe the first direct comparison of two well-established ETEC challenge models, B7A-induced clinical illness and {"type":"entrez-nucleotide","attrs":{"text":"H10407","term_id":"875229","term_text":"H10407"}}H10407-induced clinical illness. Clinical presentation, the effect of ciprofloxacin, and the immune responses to CS6, CFA/I, and LT are described below. The mucosal immune response was measured using antibody-secreting cells (ASC), and the systemic response from sera was measured using quantitative methods. This is the first time that the immune response to CS6 has been measured quantitatively after infection with wild-type ETEC.